girlgeniusfandomcom-20200214-history
Talk:Mimmoths on a stick
Is this original work or taken from somewhere? (It doesn't seem to be canonical.) Argadi 19:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC) : It's signed at the bottom by the innkeeper (only the recipe name has been changed to protect the innocent), and no, there is no GG Cookbook as yet. -- Corgi 00:26, 24 February 2009 (UTC) :: This is awesome, but I'm pretty sure the string "Mad" should be present in one or more places in the metadata. Or else a slightly better justification... or something. ⚙Zarchne 01:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC) ::: If you would like to Mad it, please go ahead - I can't remember what exactly needs to be done for that. :) -- Corgi 01:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC) There's a number of ways to "Mad" something, depending on what it is supposed to be. In general, the "Mad" idea is that speculation can be done cooperatively. This may be madly optimistic for the most part, but there it is. The Schoolmen did it, why can't we? # Probably the most controversial (in general) and least appropriate (in this particular case) would be to place it in the "Mad:" namespace by moving it to "Mad:Mimmoths on a stick". Lately I've been using Mad: for articles about things (from the "outside world") that aren't subordinate to something specific in the comic, e.g., Mad:Li'l Abner. I think this use is a good fit (though, admittedly, not identical) to its original purpose. # The least controversial thing to do would be simply to make it an article in your namespace, like User:Zarchne/Thermonuclear hypotheses. The rule is that no one is supposed to edit articles named this way (except the user whose namespace it is, of course). This is appropriate for a recipe from a non-canonical source, or anything you're writing as yourself but in article mode (rather than the conversation mode used in Talk: and Forum: pages). # The "normal" way we "Mad" something (called "/Mad") assumes that what's being added is an appendix to another article. So you have to decide whether "Mimmoths on a stick" really deserves its own article or if Mimmoths is enough. Either way, you make sure the parent page has the template (usually near the end, before ), which automatically creates a link to the /Mad page (e.g. "Mimmoth/Mad"). Then on that page, make a subsection with the recipe in it. # Orthogonal to all of the above is to simply place the article in Category:Mad. I guess this category predates the Has-Mad template and is obsolescent. It might be appropriate for an article in your namespace, though. I suppose we could have a convention whereby categorizing articles in your namespace as "Mad" means you're inviting edits (but just my saying it doesn't make it so). ⚙Zarchne 09:41, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Articles can also be put in a forum rather than the mad space. This recipe isn't canonical or a theory about the canon. 11:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC) This isn't a Mad--not according to the Mad rules. I'm going to leave it as a comestible though. -- Axi 19:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC)